World number one Jannik Sinner insists he did not get preferential treatment after avoiding a ban for two failed anti-doping tests and maintains he is “clean”.
It was revealed on Tuesday that Sinner tested positive for a banned substance twice in March but was absolved of fault or negligence by the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA).
The ITIA accepted Sinner’s explanation that clostebol, an anabolic agent that can aid muscle growth, had accidentally entered his system via a product one of his team had used to treat a small wound.
The decision has been met with criticism in the tennis world, with some players surprised at the speed at which the case was heard.
But Sinner says the quick timeframe was because he could explain the origin of the substance found in his body.
“Every player who gets tested positive has to go through the same process,” he said. “There is no shortcut, there is no different treatment, they are all the same process.
“I know sometimes the frustration of other players obviously.
“But maybe because they got suspended they didn’t know exactly where it comes from, also what substance, but the main reason is where it comes from and how it entered in his own system.
— Jannik Sinner (@janniksin) August 20, 2024
Advertisement
“We knew it straight away and we were aware of what happened. We went straight away and I was suspended for two, three days. I couldn’t practice and everything.
“But they accepted it very, very fast and that’s why (I carried on playing).”
Sinner admits the situation has been a dark cloud hanging over him, even though he won the Cincinnati Open last week.
“I always believe that I kept playing tennis because in my mind I knew that I haven’t done anything wrong,” he added.
“I knew that I was very clean and I knew that I was always looking forward to be a fair player.
“Obviously this coming out might change a couple of things but whoever knows me very well knows that I haven’t done and I would never do something what goes against the rules.
“It has been a very tough moment for me and my team. It still is, because it’s quite fresh.
“Here I also know who is my friend and who is not my friend because my friends, they know that I would never do that and sticking together.
“About my reputation, we will see now, moving forward, no? Because this, I can’t really control. So let’s see.”
British player Dan Evans, who believes Sinner is lucky to have his case dealt with so quickly, was handed a 12-month ban in 2017 after failing an anti-doping test.
He also said the ITIA is not fit for purpose, with fellow Brit Tara Moore waiting 19 months for her outcome.
“I like Jannik. It is not his fault,” Evans said. “He has put his case forward and it has been accepted.
“There have been other players who have waited. I think he is lucky how quickly the case came forward. That is a fact.
“It is difficult to see how someone like Tara Moore or (Simona) Halep couldn’t get a date and then that comes through within three months, an emergency case.
“I have an opinion on the ITIA and how they go about their business is not good.
“I have had a few different cases with that stuff and if things are true, I read Tara Moore’s tweet about them using the same lawyer when they were working for a player and vice versa.
“I think that is totally wrong, everyone getting kept in the dark is totally wrong.
“I think they are an organisation that has been thrown together and are pretty amateurish but they wear nice t-shirts and hang around the players.
For all those asking for proof: the same lawyer representing Jannik Sinner from Onside Law (Kendra Potts) is also the same lawyer who is representing the ITIA in the case against me that’s still ongoing (Kendra Potts) 🤷🏽♀️ https://t.co/7DkPpjXDmb
— Tara Moore (@TaraMoore92) August 22, 2024
“It is frustrating for other players, that is the main thing. I don’t think they do much good for the sport if I am totally honest.
“They get the guys that are 800 in the world for drugs and gambling but not… I think there is a bigger issue.
“The ITIA, I think there might be a few conflicts of interest in who is representing who and I know that for a fact.”
